Gun Review: Ruger PC Carbine w/ Aluminum Handguard

It was nearly one-and-a-half years ago when I reviewed Ruger’s then-new PC Carbine. The take-down 9mm carbine proved to be an accurate and reliable little gun that’s a lot of fun to shoot. Best of all, it features a interchangeable magazine wells so if Ruger SR-series mags aren’t your jam, you can run GLOCK pistol magazines instead. My only real gripe was with the stock.

You can use GLOCK magazines with an additional magazine well (Jeremy S. for TTAG)

Though considering how it’s offset under the barrel with the top only just high enough above the barrel to allow for M-LOK accessory attachment, I’m surprised the diameter is as large as it is. I think a skinnier handguard might look better, feel a little better, and weigh less.

Don’t fret, the barrel shoulder is just proud of the front of the handguard. Any suppressor will attach without issue.

However, should Ruger create a pistol version in the future or should you want to Form 1 yours and chop it down into an SBR, you won’t have the option of running a suppressor underneath the handguard. Which is sad. Though the diameter is large enough, the offset makes it impossible.

Takedown functionality is smoothly integrated into the design. The PC Carbine retains zero pretty dang well, but not perfectly.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

For the perfectionists, a section of M-LOK-attach Picatinny rail is included with the $729 PC Carbine with aluminum handguard models and could be used to mount one’s optic to the handguard rather than the receiver. This would ensure perfect zero retention after taking down and re-assembling.

The PC Carbine’s rear aperture sight (Jeremy S. for TTAG)

Or, sure, just use the very nice iron sights, which are mounted to the chrome-moly steel barrel itself. The rear sight pokes up through the handguard. It’s a ghost ring style sight capable of both elevation and windage adjustment. My sample was right on target.

The PC Carbine’s protected blade front sight (Jeremy S. for TTAG)

Likewise, the protected blade front sight sticks up through the aluminum free-float handguard. It isn’t adjustable, but can be swapped for different units should Ruger or the aftermarket offer upgrades.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

Other than that, kids, this is exactly the same Ruger PC Carbine we all know and love. And it has proven to be an extremely brisk seller for Ruger. It’s lots of fun and pretty useful as a home defense option, too.

Jeremy S. for TTAG

As only the handguard differs on this model (incidentally, it’s 0.2 lbs. heavier for the effort), if you aren’t up on the features and function of this fine firearm, such as the left/right swappable charging handle and reversible magazine release, internal workings, and much more, please read the original review.

While I like the ability to mount more accessories to this model, overall I’m ambivalent between this and the standard version and prefer the aesthetics of the standard model. Show me an aluminum chassis that matches this spiffy handguard and accepts AR grips and then we’ll talk about that fifth star.

Ratings (Out of five stars. See original review for more detailed ratings):

Reliability * * * * *

Accuracy * * * * *

Ergonomics * * * *

Customize This * * * *Improved here versus the original due to all that M-LOK real estate on the aluminum handguard, allowing even more accessories customization. Yet, still shy of five stars due to the stock (fixed grip design, fixed cheek rest) and the fact that a suppressor cannot be run underneath the M-LOK handguard, preventing the use of a shorter barrel without chopping the handguard down as well.

On The Range * * * * *

Overall * * * *Ultimately, for me this is a five-star gun in a three-star stock.

comments

I imagine that stock is as it is to avoid having folks in states like CA pissing themselves over ‘evil’ features. We have millions of gun owners here which is a market that sensible gun companies will not ignore. Ruger sells their mini 14 types here at a great profit.

Exactly ! The author missed the whole point of this carbine. If he wants an AR in 9mm then go get one. With 40 million ppl in Kali and 20 million in NY just these two states represent a huge market. Ruger knew what they were doing when they introduced it in the original kit.

I get it. It’s featureless and that’s nice for states that ban pistol grips and telescoping stocks and all that jazz. But the stock is cheap and crappy and the ergos are lacking. In fact, I might even call it a 5-star gun in a 3-star stock. And now it’s a cheap plastic stock that doesn’t align visually with the anodized aluminum handguard. At least previously the front and rear matched and it looked like a complete product. Now it looks like John A. GunOwner bought the thing and went to Pep Boys and upgraded only half of it 😉

Tactical Solutions needs to make a 16″ and 9″ barrel for that, and Kidd needs to make some trigger groups to fit as well. With that new Copper Custom chassis coming out, this might be the PCC/PDW to have, beating out the Scorpion, the GHM-9, and that boat anchor heavy AKV-9 from Palmetto.

Agree 100%. I like my Rugers, but there is no way I’d buy the Ruger PCC over my Scorpion. The Scorpion costs a lot more, however, but looks a lot better. But if you can’t/don’t want to spend the money for the Ruger, I’d consider one as long as it has this handguard.

“Tactical Solutions needs to make a 16″ and 9″ barrel for that, and Kidd needs to make some trigger groups to fit as well”

Ruger just needs to make the rifle better. What is the point of buying something you have to start replacing components on first thing. After you replace the barrel, stock, trigger and bolt groups, what is there left of your original purchase. Your better off going custom at that point. Ruger knows people are going to do this regardless, they learned that with their 10-22. The 10-22 was once a solid plinker that could be handed down. Now it is a plastic piece of crap because Ruger knows people are going to stuff it full of aftermarket anyway. It is all about volume and profit margin and this gun is just another exercise in that.

Plastic, lots of it. Heavier than steel for any given strength requirement. But why not, if you can save 10 cents over a steel part. Ten cents adds up to $100,00 over a million units.
Nice little profit.

my thoughts too… the ppsh look it pretty cool. however I’ve shot one of these guns, standard version. I’ve also shot a lot of other PCC’s, the ruger is the only one robust enough to butt stroke something if needed. And it runs, really well. The rest are range toys. iron sights, rail for an optic and one for a light, out of the box adjustable stock. The mlok forearm is cool, but it “fixes” a non existent problem. The ability to hang more crap on it isn’t gonna make you shoot it better.

I’m not sure which is find sillier: Ruger for building a perfectly useful PCC that doesn’t give the liberals heart attacks then turning around to offer a completely useless mall ninja tactikool handguard on it, or our author who thinks it makes the gun cool looking (while not-so-secretly lamenting that they didn’t also inflict it with that awful ‘collapsible’ AR stock).

In most situations, I question the value of a PCC today, but I recognize that there are situations where a PCC could make sense — but adding purely cosmetic features that accomplish nothing other than to make the gun non-compliant in some jurisdictions simply does not make any sense.

Never did I suggest it should have an AR stock on it. Nor did I say that the handguard makes the gun cool looking — I said the handguard looks cool, then went on to say I like the aesthetics of the original version better and that this one would look better if it had an aluminum chassis so it would balance front and rear. With some improvement to your reading comprehension you might avoid arguing with things people never said haha

Optic mounting on a float tube is not going to guarantee good accuracy, as the tube & barrel can flex/warp independently during both handling and heating. Likely a lot more variation than you’d see from a takedown/reassembly cycle.

Ive had my PC40 since the mid 90s. Other then a bit of cosmetics and the takedown. The new and old guns are basically the same. What I do wish I had from the newer gun is the barrel shroud. That is a welcome addition. The stock still sucks on both models.

As much as I love and own Rugers (and Ruger stock) I’m not a fan of this weapon.
Although the take-down feature is cool, I just can’t get into this one.
For the price I can own all 3 calibers of the Hi-Point PCC. I already have one in 9mm and that is more than enough fugly for my gun safe.
I do get the sales in un-free states though, good for my bottom line.

It’s too skinny at top, it looks and feels too cheap, and the grip angle doesn’t work for the size or shape of the gun or the drop at comb, etc. The also cheap Monte Carlo-style stock on the Fightlite SCR, for example, feels natural and comfortable and just “clicks” like a sporting style bolt action rifle that was designed for such a stock, but the ergos on this PC Carbine one are off for me.

I am seriously think about this gun as a first gun for my 11 year old son instead of a .22, so he can grow into it alittle, i have heard that because it is alittle heavier the recoil is similar to a .22. And the ergos are similar to the 10/22 takedown. His mother has been resisting me buying him a gun or i would have years ago. But he is old enough to have his own now instead of using mine. Pretty sure he is getting a cool gift from dad on fathers day instead of dad getting a tie. Lol

When Ruger comes out with caliber change kits for the PCC the game will be changed. Sure, the kits will cost a lot but the idea of changing pill sizes in a matter of minutes is a good one. This has to be on the horizon. I’m not an expert but I can’t see problems beyond barrel, mag well, and re coil mechanism preventing an .45 version.

I got one of these because I had an old PC I wanted to get rid of. I took them both out to the woods and peppered the hell out of the Bill Gates box. The gun worked ok but I recommend that if you got an old PC to destroy then you best to use a shotgun.
Personally I think that computer killing is an over played market and don’t see why Ruger decided to make a gun for it.

Why? Why would you do that? That’s a full-up AR right there. At that point I might as well just take the pin out of the lower receiver and call it a “take down” AR. I’m sure its well made being a Ruger, but… Full disclosure, I own a Sub2000 which I full admit is little more than two pipes on a hinge, but it doesn’t pretend to be anything more than it is for a reasonable price point. I even built an 8in 300blk for roughly (less) than the same price. But if 7lbs is your idea of a take down back packing rifle, more power to you. But the 9mm straight blowback market is overpriced and frankly, ridiculous in most cases.